On July 22, 2019, a report by the New
York Times published a stunning new revelation of two rival Gulf states trading guns, cash, and
profit in Puntland. United Arab Emirates and Qatar each supply
"weapons and military training to favored factions...competing for
contracts to manage ports or exploit natural resources, per the report," [1].
The report also warns of conflict escalation and potential destabilization of Northern Somalia as these two
rival Gulf states employ Cold War tactics, largely
viewing Somalia from the narrow lens of a client state.
Qatar did not dismiss the veracity of the secret recording that implicates a Qatari official in the alleged bombing of the Bossaso port and the assassination of the Emirati employee, rather it frames the recording as a private communication that does not reflect the official position of Qatar’s foreign policy toward Somalia. Qatar’s actions only served to embolden UAE’s dubious tactics to achieve its short-term hegemonic position at the expense of the fragile peace in Northern Somalia and by pitting one community against another.
Historically, the motives or strategic interest of foreign powers in the area dates back to 1948. Per a declassified report, British Proposal for Rectification of the Anglo-Italian Somaliland Boundary at Bender Ziada, both Britain and Italy considered this area, which includes Majihan and Dallan, a “potential mineral belt". The Italians were the first to mine Mijihan (Magio Yihan), per the report. The British, then, desired to subsume the area in its old Protectorate and build a road and landing point for military consideration and a port as a "potential outlet for developments in mining and fishing industry". The report describes the Northeastern coast of the Protectorate as a territory largely "inhabited by the Warsangeli."
The Motives of UAE
After meeting with the director of Abu Dhabi Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ADCCI), Mr. Deni, Puntland’s president, gave an interview to a local media. He declared to defeat the militant group in Galgala mountains to “attract investors”, according to Bloomberg. Details of the meeting seem sparse and opaque but the ADCCI deputy director tweeted that they had discussed investment opportunities. UAE is aiming to achieve its several key objectives at the expense of peace in the region. First it wants Somalia to: (a) reconsider and reverse its policy of neutrality in the Saudi-led fight against the Hauthis of Yemen, (b) build military bases to possibly contain the spread of political Islam on the Gulf of Aden, and (c) safeguard its commercial interest. Northern Somalia’s relatively stable political environment is hanging on the balance.
Somali people have suffered under
these policies as UAE continues to apply
various economic levers at its disposal (aid, sanctions, restricted visa
travels). UAE has also backed Puntland and other member sub-states to coalesce and
suspend any form of collaborative relationship aimed at state-building goals. This
systematically undermines the confidence
and legitimacy of the Federal Government. The crisis in Jubaland has
only exacerbated the current political turmoil and security challenges the
country is in. The Federal Government attempted to create a balanced
and less corrupt electoral process for Jubaland, but that plan failed due to the incumbent’s
drive to run for another term in office against the insistence of
other underrepresented communities who called for an inclusive political space to secure their fundamental rights under a free and
democratic process.
A policy paper by a group of intelligentsia and former politicians from Puntland have even called for the abrogation of the Federal charter - the provisional constitution--in exchange of confederation—a system that parallels or subordinates the powers of the Federal Government to the States. Confederation is defined as a union of states. Under this model, the central government derives its legitimate authority from the States; essentially, it has no direct authority over the people.
By contrast, in a system of federation as that of the United States, the model government is a system of union—both states and the federal government exercise and receive direct authority over the people[2] with federal laws taking precedence over state laws. Others argue that a government that reaches the people is more important, irrespective of which system Somalis adopt to govern their affairs. A system of confederation, however, is a return to the state of nature as expounded by John Locke. Prior to the onset of collective Somali resistance against imperial powers, the concept of nation-state governed by a social contract between the people and the state was virtually nonexistent. Each Somali clan was sovereign and maintained a defined territory, defined population, and defined history to run its own affairs independent of external force.
We ask outside governments to
respect Somalia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity; Systematic aid
(humanitarian or otherwise) cannot substitute for the nation’s sovereignty and
territorial integrity; any contractual agreement, therefore, between a foreign state and
Somali region should not be allowed to bypass constitutionally mandated
national government agencies, in line with the
president’s proclamation. Foreign policy is vested with the national government. Anytime the sovereignty of the country is on the line, Somalis are duty bound to defend the Nation from domestic and foreign enemies.
By Mohamed Elmi
References
[1] Bergman, Ronen.,
Kirkpatrick, David. (2019, July 22). With Guns, Cash and Terrorism, Gulf States
Vie for Power
in Somalia. The New York Times.
Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/22/world/africa/somalia-qatar-uae.html
[2] Burns, J. M., & Peltason, W. j. (1972). Government
by the people . New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. .
3. Central Intelligence Agency. (1948). British Proposal for Rectification of the Anglo-Italian Somaliland Boundary at Bender Ziada.
